Investigating Dynamics of COVID-19 Spread and Containment with Agent-Based Modeling

  1. Amirarsalan Rajabi
  2. Alexander V. Mantzaris
  3. Ece C. Mutlu
  4. Ozlem O. Garibay

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Governments, policy makers, and officials around the globe are working to mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic by making decisions that strive to save the most lives and impose the least economic costs. Making these decisions require comprehensive understanding of the dynamics by which the disease spreads. In traditional epidemiological models, individuals do not adapt their contact behavior during an epidemic, yet adaptive behavior is well documented (i.e., fear-induced social distancing). In this work we revisit Epstein’s “coupled contagion dynamics of fear and disease” model in order to extend and adapt it to explore fear-driven behavioral adaptations and their impact on efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. The inclusion of contact behavior adaptation endows the resulting model with a rich dynamics that under certain conditions reproduce endogenously multiple waves of infection. We show that the model provides an appropriate test bed for different containment strategies such as: testing with contact tracing and travel restrictions. The results show that while both strategies could result in flattening the epidemic curve and a significant reduction of the maximum number of infected individuals; testing should be applied along with tracing previous contacts of the tested individuals to be effective. The results show how the curve is flattened with testing partnered with contact tracing, and the imposition of travel restrictions.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.3390/app11125367
  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.08.18.20177451v2 on medRxiv
  3. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.08.18.20177451: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2020.08.18.20177451v1 on medRxiv